Some progymnasmata programs suggest a study of rhetoric after the progymnasmata. I know CW includes rhetoric lessons through out, so should a student who completes the CW series still take a course in Rhetoric? (ex Classical Rhetoric for the Modern Student)

We believe that the entire topic of rhetoric is inherent in the Progymnasmata. It’s ALL rhetoric of sorts, so we teach it at each level to the extent that we think the students are mature and prepared well enough to absorb it.

That being said, a college-level course specifically geared to rhetoric would be a wonderful thing to end with.

Just to clarify, how does the rhetoric taught in CW differ from using books like Composition in the Classical Tradition or Classical Rhetoric for the Modern Student?

Don't get me wrong, I like how CW teaches rhetoric throughout. I have the CW books through Herodotus here. I'm having a discussion with a friend; we are comparing ways to teach rhetoric to our high school students. We are wondering if these books overlap what is taught in CW or if they take off from where CW stops. If one student learns rhetoric via CW and another thru just these books will they have the same understanding of rhetoric when they are done?

Our chief sources are Aristotle, Quintilian, Hermogenes, Theon, Aphthonius, and Cicero. That is what we have based our rhetoric in --- our best understanding of how they were able to achieve success in teaching the canons of rhetoric to their students.

That being said... yes, we read Corbett and D'Angelo and several other modern college texts on rhetoric. We are not in conflict with any of their understanding (it would be folly, since these scholars are by far more proficient in Greek and Latin than we are), but we have avoided, for the most part their broader and more modern adoptation/adaptation of rhetoric as more fluid and temporally conditioned.

For my work with figures of speech, Corbett was my starting point, and his sources were my sources for starters. When we first began researching the progymnasmata, D'Angelo (but also Aphthonius) was one of our first touch points.

I do not know if that answers your question or not, but yes, I think we cover everything that those books cover, more or less... but where we differ is that our topics for discussion are not 'date rape' and its implications, or 'hate speech' on campus, or many of the other state college oriented applications that these writers take. Nor have we delved too deeply into modern issues in general. We prefer to stay in the ancient sources and wrestle with older literature and its rhetorical usage.

Thanks, your response was great.I've been thinking about this again as I am now teaching two of the four CW classes we have at our co-op. My 8th graders will be starting Diogenes in a few weeks. With that level they will begin their Commonplace books ... which basically begins their more formal study of rhetoric. I was wondering if it would be appropriate to tell the moms that by the time they are done with the CW series that the students will also earn high school credit for Rhetoric? Given all the Commonplace entries and the A&I work, it seems reasonable. And if it is, how much high school credit do you think they could earn?